Risk Factors for Periprosthetic Joint Infection Following Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty

2020 ◽  
Vol 102 (6) ◽  
pp. 503-509 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Periprosthetic Joint Infection ◽  
Joint Infection ◽  
Total Hip ◽  
Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty

scholarly journals DOES TOPICAL USE OF GENTAMICIN REDUCE THE INFECTION RATE IN PRIMARY TOTAL HIP ARTHROPLASTY?

2019 ◽  
Vol 27 (4) ◽  
pp. 197-201 ◽  
Author(s):  
Caio Luiz de Toledo Oliveira ◽  
Felipe Abrahão Elias ◽  
André dos Santos Ribacionka ◽  
Celso Hermínio Ferraz Picado ◽  
Flávio Luís Garcia
Keyword(s):  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Antibiotic Prophylaxis ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Periprosthetic Joint Infection ◽  
Joint Infection ◽  
University Hospital ◽  
Fisher Exact Test ◽  
Infection Rates ◽  
Total Hip ◽  
Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty

ABSTRACT Objective: To determine whether the topical use of gentamicin reduces periprosthetic joint infection rates in primary total hip arthroplasty (THA). Methods: We retrospectively evaluated two cohorts of patients who underwent primary THA in a university hospital, with a minimum of 1-year postoperative follow-up and full clinical, laboratory, and radiological documentation. Patients who underwent operation in the first 59 months of the study period (263 hips) received only intravenous cefazolin as antibiotic prophylaxis (Cef group), and those who underwent operation in the following 43 months (170 hips) received intravenous cefazolin plus topical gentamicin directly applied on the wound as antibiotic prophylaxis (Cef + Gen group). For the diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection, we used the criteria of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Data were analyzed using the Fisher exact test, and p values of <0.05 were considered significant. Results: Thirteen hips (4.9%) in the Cef group and eight hips (4.7%) in the Cef + Gen group presented periprosthetic joint infection. Statistical analysis revealed no difference between the infection rates (p = 1.0). Conclusion: Topical gentamicin as used in this study did not reduce periprosthetic joint infection rates in primary THA. Level of Evidence III, Retrospective comparative study.

Treatment for Chronic Hepatitis C Prior to Total Hip Arthroplasty Significantly Reduces Periprosthetic Joint Infection

2019 ◽  
Vol 34 (1) ◽  
pp. 132-135 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hany S. Bedair ◽  
Brian M. Schurko ◽  
Maureen K. Dwyer ◽  
David Novikov ◽  
Afshin A. Anoushiravani ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Chronic Hepatitis ◽  
Hepatitis C ◽  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Chronic Hepatitis C ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Periprosthetic Joint Infection ◽  
Joint Infection ◽  
Total Hip

The effect of bearing surface on risk of periprosthetic joint infection in total hip arthroplasty

2018 ◽  
Vol 100-B (2) ◽  
pp. 134-142 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. T. Hexter ◽  
S. M. Hislop ◽  
G. W. Blunn ◽  
A. D. Liddle
Keyword(s):  
Total Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Hip Arthroplasty ◽  
Periprosthetic Joint Infection ◽  
Observational Studies ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Joint Infection ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Bearing Surface ◽  
Total Hip

Aims Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a serious complication of total hip arthroplasty (THA). Different bearing surface materials have different surface properties and it has been suggested that the choice of bearing surface may influence the risk of PJI after THA. The objective of this meta-analysis was to compare the rate of PJI between metal-on-polyethylene (MoP), ceramic-on-polyethylene (CoP), and ceramic-on-ceramic (CoC) bearings. Patients and Methods Electronic databases (Medline, Embase, Cochrane library, Web of Science, and Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature) were searched for comparative randomized and observational studies that reported the incidence of PJI for different bearing surfaces. Two investigators independently reviewed studies for eligibility, evaluated risk of bias, and performed data extraction. Meta-analysis was performed using the Mantel–Haenzel method and random-effects model in accordance with methods of the Cochrane group. Results Our search strategy revealed 2272 studies, of which 17 met the inclusion criteria and were analyzed. These comprised 11 randomized controlled trials and six observational studies. The overall quality of included studies was high but the observational studies were at high risk of bias due to inadequate adjustment for confounding factors. The overall cumulative incidence of PJI across all studies was 0.78% (1514/193 378). For each bearing combination, the overall incidence was as follows: MoP 0.85% (1353/158 430); CoP 0.38% (67/17 489); and CoC 0.53% (94/17 459). The meta-analysis showed no significant difference between the three bearing combinations in terms of risk of PJI. Conclusion On the basis of the clinical studies available, there is no evidence that bearing choice influences the risk of PJI. Future research, including basic science studies and large, adequately controlled registry studies, may be helpful in determining whether implant materials play a role in determining the risk of PJI following arthroplasty surgery. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:134–42.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document